Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

YRUZ x402 tools

by io.github.xzntexe
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

YRUZ DependencyPulse Version History (0.006 USDC)

deps_get_version_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Release history of a package in ecosystem order (node-semver, PEP 440, Composer): every version with publish time, prerelease flag, deprecation or yank with its reason, which one is latest, release cadence, and changes YRUZ observed between its own snapshots (labelled system-observed). Price: 0.006 USDC per call, paid with x402 (USDC on Base or Solana, no account, no API key); invalid input is refused before payment and a failed run is never charged. Without a payment the tool returns the x402 PaymentRequired. How to call it: get_example {"tool":"deps_get_version_history"}. Same tool over HTTP: https://yruz.one/api/deps/versions?ecosystem=pypi&name=requests&limit=20

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "deps_get_version_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYespackage name (required)
limitNoversions to return, newest first, 1-200 (default 50)
ecosystemNonpm (default), pypi or composer
prereleaseNo1 to include prereleases (default 0)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / ecosystem / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "pypi"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "20"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "requests"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: 0.006 USDC per call via x402 (USDC on Base or Solana, no account/key), invalid input refused before payment, failed runs never charged, and an x402 PaymentRequired response when unpaid. That is exactly the payment/auth/error context annotations cannot convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the return payload, then payment terms, then invocation instructions — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The trailing literal HTTP URL is somewhat expendable but is still actionable content rather than padding.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating the fields returned. Combined with payment terms, error behavior, and the get_example escape hatch, an agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: 'ecosystem order' is disambiguated as node-semver, PEP 440, or Composer, and the HTTP example demonstrates ecosystem/name/limit combination. It doesn't elaborate the prerelease flag or limit bounds beyond the schema, so it stops short of a 5.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Opens with a precise verb+resource ('Release history of a package') and then enumerates exactly what is returned: publish time, prerelease flag, deprecation/yank with reason, latest marker, release cadence, and observed changes. That level of specificity makes it distinguishable from deps_get_changes and deps_compare_releases without opening their schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives strong operational guidance on *how* to call (get_example, HTTP endpoint, payment flow) but says nothing about *when* to choose this over deps_get_changes, deps_compare_releases, or deps_get_package. Usage is implied by the resource name rather than by explicit selection criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All YRUZ x402 tools toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources